Butte semi-weekly miner. [volume] (Butte, Mont.) 1886-1890, 1887-10-29
Arguments Begun In the Anarchist Pc
titfon for Writ Of Error Before
the Supreme Bench.
Randolph Tucker Bases His Reasoning
on tho Fourteenth and the First
Ten Constitutional
Amendments.
He Is Followed BY Attorney.Geueral
Hunt, Of Illinois, in an Able
Argument for the Stale.

2 ~ H. o&0V4DV ava U140 ASSosVS
WA1n1HeroH, October 27.-About ]
O'clock Mr.. Tucker opened tie argument IL
of the petition for . writ OF erro,
30 the case of The Chicago Anarchists. He
5aid it was not necessary for him to show
50 condition precedent to the granting
Df the writ that the action complained Of
IN the court below was actually repugnant
TO or in violation Of the Constitution. 1t
was only necessary to show that q conflict
had arisen, that there was in question
whether the action complained Of was not
repuenant to the Constitution. That was
enough to
GIVE THIS COURT JURISDICTION;
It was not necessary to show repugnancy
but only conflict. If there is conflict then
this court has jurisdiction. and if it has
jurisdiction then the petitioners are enti-
ted to the writ as right policy. This
court, he said. mad been known to deal
literally with petitions for writs Of error
in civil cases. How much more should it
error in a criminal case involving the ie-
snes of life and death in a case where life
was about to be taken away in violation
OF the Constitution? Tucker then pro.
ceeded to Carefully analyze the fourteenth
amendment and attempted to ascertain
the meaning OF the words ''due process of
law"
ON THE MERITS.
Proceeding then to the merits oithe case,
Tucker said it was not necessary that a
law of state should be absolutely and on
its face unconstitutional in order to give
this court jurisdiction of the case under it..
II a law, seemingly fair and just on it's face,
should have put upon it by State courts a
contrary to the Constitution
that was enough to give this court jurisdic-
tien. Tucker then reviewed the history Of
the adoption OF the fourteenth ndment
ant said, although it was originally intend
ed to guarantee particularly the rights OF
the enfranchieed blacks, there Was no
reason Why white citizens should not
ENJOY THE BENEFITS
Of it's provisions. Tucker quoted the four
teenth amendment and discussed the mean.
ing of the words 'due process of law" and
said: "Although it has been held by this
court that trial without indictment by the
Grand Jury might be by due process Of
law and might be perfectly constitutional
it never had been held or intimated that
tsial by petit jury could be dispensed with.
I seemed" he said, ito be everywhere con-
coded that due process of law required
t.Sa, BY ry OF ones peers. It. is essential
that the jury should be unbiased. unpre.
l;noI nd i'm no rfio1 on6 that IL ahnnl6
not be q class jury"
Mr.. TUCKER THEN ASSERTED
that the jury law Of Illinois was unconsti'
tutional in that it provided that forming
of an opinion from reports or from news
paper accounts OF certain transactions
having such opinion from sitting in judg-
ment on that transaction as q juror, even
although the law might seem to be fair and
just. II by construction and administra-
tion it were made to deny to prisoners the
right OF trial by fair and impartial jury,
then such construction and administration
law and made it unconstitu
tional. The construction given to the law
in this case was different from the construc-
ticn given it in large number OF other
cases in the same State. He then referred
to objections made by the defense at the
trial to
RULINGS OF THE COURT
in the matter of challenges, to the refusal
of court. on motion Tor q new trial, to
hear the evidence going to show that q
bailiff had said that 1.-THE men he had &c.
lected for panel would be certain to hang, F."
and to various other rulings and decisions
Of the trial court which had the effect OF
denying to the prisoners a fair trial by an
impartial jury. Turning then to another
question raised by the case which, he said,
was not one in this court, he quoted the
second clause of the fourteenth amend
ment. to the effect that no State shall
make or enforce any law which shall
abridgs the privileges or immunities OF
citizens of the United States. Among
the 'privileges and immunities' thus
guaranteed by the fourteenth amendment.
we're, he contended, those get forth in the
first ten amendments to the Federal Con.
stitution. 1t had been maintained he said
that these first ten amendments to the
Constitution were limitations OF the Federal
power only, but it was his belief that un-
less the privileges and immunities were
specifically said to be merely
LIMITATIONS OF THE FEDERAL POWER,
they were privileges and immunities which
came within the purview of the fourteenth
amendment and were guaranteed by it.
Chief Justice Waite: Then you would bring
ali the questions to this court. / cannot
conceive Of any question which cannot be
brought here if the fourteenth amendment
makes the "privileges and immunities' to
which it refers include all those OF the flrst
ten amendments.
Tucker said he would admit it was a
new question, but he should like to
argue it. "Now l make the assertion,
said Tucker, shat the right to be exempt
from unreasonable searches and seizures,
the right OF freedom of speech. the right oi
the citizen against sefaccusatiOn and the
right of the citizen not to be twice tried by
a Jury are secured to him by virtue Of the
Constitution OF the United States. Being
80, the fourteenth amendment comes in
and SAYS, no State shall make or enforce
any law which
ABR1DcEs THE RIGHTS OR PRIVILEGES
OF citizens" Turning to the action and
rulings of the trial court, Mr.. Tucker said
the defense were driven to peremptor.y
c balleppes in order to exclude jurors who
should he exempt for cause and thereby
was a Limitation OF the right of peremptory
challenge, which this court has held to be
one of the highest privileges Of the prisoner
The last four jurors" said Mr.. Tucker,
"were put upon the jury after our peremp'
tory challenges had been exhausted. In
one case, Juror Denker, We objected dis:
tinctly upon the ground that the ruling OF
the court was in violation Of the Contitu
ton" Tucker then referred tu the seizures
OF letters. private papers. etc, and the'l
use, as evidence. and said this was . VIC
lation OF the fourth amendment. In con-
clusion Tucker said: I'VE have 9
right, in my judgment, to d
writ to be heard on the question
whether the Constitution has been violated
10 order to compass the conviction OF thest
men. It is true they are said to be anarch
lists, but they are men and are entitled to
The same protection am. know no an
archy abroad in 10 land which the Amer
ica n people need fear except the anarchy o
the administration of Justice. pray thu
court will therefore award this writ. Tor i
I do not mistake there are evidences in thu
whole record which will demand . reversa
OF judgment"
ATTORNEY oENEkAL HUNT
then ss.dtesssd the court IN hshAE =! th'